Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[hack]

But, again, if you're wondering about how religion influences politics and the public space you might want to do a comparative study. Some of the most vicious of culture wars have originated from religion. Abortion is a primary example. Homosexuality. Religious people worldwide have these debates. Some of them demonize each other just like Americans do, but many of them don't. Canada is a great example. We don't have Westboro people. We have the stray evangelical who wants to stand and scream outside an abortion clinic, and most of the opposition to those people comes from fellow evangelicals who recognize that they don't get to impose theor own morals on others, even if they'd like to. It's a great comparison. Would have reversed the question on Beinart. Worldwide, religion gives people the ammunition and arrogance to disdain others. Same is true in America. Beinart should spent time out of Dc. Like in Iraq. He oversaw a terrible and intellectually shoddy pro-war stance in 2002 heading the New Republic. He's a very incomplete thinker. But I don't mean to be uncharitble to you in posting it. I don't like him outside the great work he's done on Zionism's decline in America, but there is some interesting stuff in there and it was worth reading. Beinart just pisses me off.

As for Trump, again, nobody bothered. Whether cost is the obstacle or the legal system or whatever, and clearly the wall is a big-cost thing, nobody bothered to unpack the details. Bernie too. Take the platform as a whole and chose to be skeptical or not. Better to itemize and unpack. That would really help political debate.

[entropy]

It's more than just the election, a lot of Russian money has floated into Trump over the years. Did Trump officials get money and/or stakes in Rosneft for lifting of the sanctions. When you have a mobbed up President, there is going to be a lot of issues.

don't disagree Froot on the questions and concerns. I'm just responding to the phrase that Putin wanted trump to win... US has preferences in foreign elections as well. That doesn't matter.

[entropy]

if one's position is the use of gas crossed the line, then trumps response is a good one, imo. More than a paper threat... and sends a message that certain acts can't be ignored.

people can't have it both ways.. You can't complain he's doing nothing and complain he did something. I can buy the "crossing the line" opinion. But sadly, most debate is party politics and not about policy or philosophy.

[hack]

don't disagree Froot on the questions and concerns. I'm just responding to the phrase that Putin wanted trump to win... US has preferences in foreign elections as well. That doesn't matter.

I agree. Dumb question. Nor is the issue whether he tried to influence it. The issue is whether any Americans in an official position or facilitating one collaborated with him, took favors, compromised security, etc. etc. We know Flynn did. We know Page did. We don't know if Sessions did or not, but he lied under oath about doing something that wasn't by definition illegal. We also know Trump has significant financial exposure to Russian interests and that Russian intelligence has significant access to compromising details about Trump, Flynn, and other people with security clearances.

And yet we are talking about Susan Rice. Shit's insane.

[Wild Hoss]

They ain't turn no cheek for no motherfucker.

Heh. As the Trashman used to say....ruthless and toothless.

[entropy]

hack.. no different than my concerns about Hillary and SA. So far, can we say for certain Trump has been influenced in any way?

[CGVT]

[Wild Hoss]

A good question raised last night....what, if anything, did those Russians stationed at that airfield know about the chem attacks sortied from it a few days ago?

Maybe nothing; by definition, airbases are large facilities. But those offering technical support for air ops have access to the specific areas where such activities could be discovered.

[hack]

What is SA?

Yes, we can say for certain he was influenced. The Russians got the edit to the GOP platform on Ukraine ahead of the convention. But that's not the standard. The standard is whether national security has been compromised. Unless you're saying that it's OK for people with intelligence access to take money from Russian interests or that it's OK for people to have intelligence access even if Russia has them by the balls. Is that really what you're saying?

The double standard here is completely insane. People went apeshit over the potential compromising of national security via Hillary's emails. And are now doing their best to ignore that Trump's campaign actually really did compromise national security, and may still be doing so and have every intention of continuing to do so. This is all complete nonsense.

If national security is now just a tool for the right to persecute the left or vice versa, then fuck it -- there's no point in even trying to have classified information. The bigger the system, the harder it is to keep secure. Mannings, Snowdens. If we are unable to keep secrets, and unable to identify why that is or to punish those who make the system insecure and keep them away from it, then why are we spending so much money on a complete failure that puts lives at risk? End classification, or shrink the system down to something manageable.

[entropy]

Saudi Arabia

[entropy]

What is SA?

Yes, we can say for certain he was influenced. The Russians got the edit to the GOP platform on Ukraine ahead of the convention. But that's not the standard. The standard is whether national security has been compromised. Unless you're saying that it's OK for people with intelligence access to take money from Russian interests or that it's OK for people to have intelligence access even if Russia has them by the balls. Is that really what you're saying?

The double standard here is completely insane. People went apeshit over the potential compromising of national security via Hillary's emails. And are now doing their best to ignore that Trump's campaign actually really did compromise national security, and may still be doing so and have every intention of continuing to do so. This is all complete nonsense.

If national security is now just a tool for the right to persecute the left or vice versa, then fuck it -- there's no point in even trying to have classified information. The bigger the system, the harder it is to keep secure. Mannings, Snowdens. If we are unable to keep secrets, and unable to identify why that is or to punish those who make the system insecure and keep them away from it, then why are we spending so much money on a complete failure that puts lives at risk? End classification, or shrink the system down to something manageable.

I agree with a lot of this Hack.. My question is do we know for certain? I don't.. maybe I've missed the evidence. seems like a lot of "they've met" or "they know each other" ... That said, we certainly need to be aware of those relationships and the questions should be asked if something was compromised.

I'm less concerned about a country or person influencing policy and I'd suggest all presidents and candidates are influenced by their interactions with foreign countries. We as voters can decide if certain countries are more of a concern to us than others..

It is an issue when national security is exposed or compromised. 100% agree.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Unemployment dropped again (Yay Trump) but jobs created fell far shorter than expected (Thanks, Obama)

[iam416]

Thankfully, we are now back to a full-strength Supreme Court. Ds from Indiana, WV and ND joined the Rs in voting yes.

[THE_WIZARD_]

Shaddup

[Da Geezer]

He had me until the last sentence. Just IMO but he's writing about the symptom, not the cause. The cause is economic. There's capitalism and there's free markets, and they mistakenly viewed as parallel forces rather than zero-sum. We have more of the former and less of the latter. Flip that, via the Sanders agenda or something akin to it that knocks out the rent-seeking and boosts meritocracy of people and ideas, and this becomes a non-story.

Hack, you cannot with any credibility continue to define capitalism as only you see it. Capitalism, in every case, in every time, presupposes a free market. I don't know what your definition of capitalism is, but you are flatly wrong when you exclude free-markets as a major component. Give me an example of what is a capitalist system in your world. I also have no clue what you mean when you say capitalism and free markets are a zero sum game and I bet you don't either. I'm all ears.

Further, you presuppose that Sanders' agenda somehow boosts "meritocracy of people and ideas". How is merit determined in this brave new world? These are nice sounding words, but they have no content at all. Precisely how does free college tuition, or the forgiveness of college debt, produce a meritocracy of ideas or people? Seems to me it makes everyone equal. Or take nationalized health care. Do you actually think everyone paying the same, or delivering the same care if you are a provider, results in a meritocracy of people or of ideas? Why would anyone ever do research to come up with new drugs or develop new procedures? I presume the all-knowing hacks of the world would be the ones to direct who gets what in terms of health care, or of debt forgiveness, or of wages or whatever. Bernie Sanders, of necessity, must presume that a meritocracy exists prior to the institution of his agenda. That meritocracy is more commonly known as statists.

There is a name for the "..this becomes a non-story..." Economists call that the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. That is when the state fades away, all are equal, and everyone lives in brotherhood and peace. You know, The Bernie Agenda.